Location: Between the first and second floor of the Eiffel Tower, France

Posts: 2,682

Legally and powerfully speaking, what will it change if Camilla becomes Queen consort ? Seemingly a Queen consort doesn't have any official power. She's certainly a major advisor of the King (and I assume Camilla already accomplishes this role). So, whether Camilla is Queen consort or not, what will it change for the UK ?

What happened in 1937 with the issuance of letters patent denying Wallis royal rank created a legal precedent for a morganatic marriage in the UK.

She was denied the rank and title of "HRH Princess Edward", which should have been hers automatically by law, and allowed only "Her Grace Wallis, Duchess of Windsor", which was inferior to her husband's rank and title as a son of the Sovereign.

There is no question the marriage was morganatic legally.

What I understand from what people who were happened to be there during that one of the most unsettled times of our history is that because the reigning king abdicating so suddenly (due to his marriage) was such an extraordinary event and the abdicated king was to have his kingly title deprived from himself etc was also unusual, this situation was treated as such an extraordinary matter.

Re: the idea of not creating Wallis Simpson as Her Royal Highness seemed to have come from the King because he was concerned about the possibility of Wallis divorcing from his older brother in due course (as she had done so from her previous husbands twice before) and he felt that it might become difficult to take Her Royal Highness away from her should she ever divorce from the Duke of Windsor etc, the King in the end decided not to creat her Her Royal Highness. For the duke also had renounced all his rights to the British throne upon his abdication, according to the government, his marriage to Wallis was not regarded as a morganatic one.

Though legally there was no law re: "morganatic" marriage existed in England, for the House of Hanover as well as the House of Saxe-Coburg-Gotha were both tied to their house laws re: the "non-moganatic" marriage, until the dynasty's name was changed to Windsor, they all married to non Roman Catholic people who were born as royal, serene or ducal highnesses.

Re: Camilla being created as the Princess Consort

Though she may automatically become HM the Queen (consort) upon her husband's assenssion to the throne, it is possible for her to use the title of HRH the Princess Consort with the style of the Princess Camilla should she be created as such. Having said that, what will happen during the coronation of her husband will be a matter of dispute. Will she be annointed as the queen consort or will she not be annointed after her husband having been annointed as the king ? If she is going to be annointed, then, she should be known as HM the Queen. Then, the Prince of Wales himself nowadays says that he'd rather be known as the Defender or the Faiths rather than the Defender of the Faith (of the Church of England), he himself may wish not to be annointed as king. Then all the matters re: the office of king may become rather non-English that our parliament in Westminster will probably have to re-design the nature of the office of king.

The marriage was morganatic. His wife was not HRH Princess Edward because the King issued letters patent specifically denying her the right to share her husband's rank. Once that happened, it became law.

Camilla's assumption of a lesser style and rank as HRH The Princess Consort (provided Parliament agrees to remove her right to be The Queen) would also be morganatic. It is not possible for The King to issue letters patent creating her a princess when she is HM The Queen.

So, when Charles becomes King will it be a similar situation of her legally holding the title of HM The Queen Camilla but instead choosing to style herself as HRH The Princess Consort?

No, it will not. She is legally a princess right now and holds many other titles as the wife of the heir to the throne. She has chosen to be styled as HRH The Duchess of Cornwall, rather than her senior title as Princess of Wales, with the consent of The Queen. Regardless of which title she uses, she is a princess by marriage automatically.

But once Charles becomes King, there is no other title for his wife except being HM The Queen. She cannot "choose" to be a princess or hold the style of HRH because she is automatically Queen in law. Therefore, Parliament must consent to the King's wife reliniquishing her superior rank and title and assuming a lesser one.

Legally and powerfully speaking, what will it change if Camilla becomes Queen consort ? Seemingly a Queen consort doesn't have any official power. She's certainly a major advisor of the King (and I assume Camilla already accomplishes this role). So, whether Camilla is Queen consort or not, what will it change for the UK ?

It won't. I think this was a classic case of buying a bit of short-term peace at the cost of creating a long-term problem. I mean, even last year you could see how easily the Daily Mail could whip up anti-Camilla resentment and pro-Diana feelings when the business of the memorial service came up. It's quite possible that the royal advisors felt that if they said anything at all about her becoming Queen, they could be faced with a situation where Charles really might have to choose between her and the throne.

No, it will not. She is legally a princess right now and holds many other titles as the wife of the heir to the throne. She has chosen to be styled as HRH The Duchess of Cornwall, rather than her senior title as Princess of Wales, with the consent of The Queen. Regardless of which title she uses, she is a princess by marriage automatically.

But once Charles becomes King, there is no other title for his wife except being HM The Queen. She cannot "choose" to be a princess or hold the style of HRH because she is automatically Queen in law. Therefore, Parliament must consent to the King's wife reliniquishing her superior rank and title and assuming a lesser one.

Nobody is saying that she can choose to BE a princess when she's Queen. The issue is whether she can legally be KNOWN AS a princess even though she's Queen. For one thing, presumably Buckingham Palace didn't come up with this "it is intended that she be known as Princess Consort" stuff out of thin air. For another, it isn't illegal to be known as something you aren't as long as you don't intend to defraud anyone. For another, it's still on the royal family website.

I understand the "title" situation but as Princess Consort will she be crowned in the Abbey ceremony with the Queen Consort crown worn last by the Queen Mother? (I apologize, I know beforehand this is building a mountain out of a molehill...but seriously, I wonder)

No, it will not. She is legally a princess right now and holds many other titles as the wife of the heir to the throne. She has chosen to be styled as HRH The Duchess of Cornwall, rather than her senior title as Princess of Wales, with the consent of The Queen. Regardless of which title she uses, she is a princess by marriage automatically.

But once Charles becomes King, there is no other title for his wife except being HM The Queen. She cannot "choose" to be a princess or hold the style of HRH because she is automatically Queen in law. Therefore, Parliament must consent to the King's wife reliniquishing her superior rank and title and assuming a lesser one.

Camilla's full style is Her Royal Highness, The Princess Charles Philip Arthur George, Princess of Wales and Countess of Chester, Duchess of Cornwall, Duchess of Rothesay, Countess of Carrick, Baroness of Renfrew, Lady of the Isles, Princess of Scotland. However, she cannot style herself as the Princess Camilla currently for she has not yet been created as such. The Queen may creat Camilla the Princess Camilla in due course as she created her husband the Prince Philip shortly after her succession to the throne.

It may be possible for Camilla to style herself as HRH the Princess Camilla the Princess Consort after her husband's assession to the throne since there is no law to forbid her to be styled as HRH rather than HM if the sovereign who is the fount of honour grants her such a title. However, it is customary for the King of England's wife to be styled as HM the Queen.

In addition to this, the wife of the King of Morocco is styled as HRH the Princess Consort.

It is also customary for the King of England to be crowned & annointed by the Archbishop of Canterbury after his succession to the throne, however, it is not by law, yet he must be an Anglican by faith etc by the Act of Settlement. I wonder what will happen during Charles' coronation. Will Camilla be annointed as the queen or will she not be annointed should she wish to be style as the Princess Consort ?

The marriage was morganatic. His wife was not HRH Princess Edward because the King issued letters patent specifically denying her the right to share her husband's rank. Once that happened, it became law.

Stanley Baldwin's government did not regard the Duke of Windsor's marriage to Wallis as morganatic because the duke had already renounced all the rights to the throne for himself as well as his future children between him and Wallis.

Maybe Charles, upon becoming King, could just phone up, say, the King of Norway and ask if he could make Camilla a Princess of Norway. Then she could style herself "HRH Princess Camilla." That's very far-fetched, though.

I understand the "title" situation but as Princess Consort will she be crowned in the Abbey ceremony with the Queen Consort crown worn last by the Queen Mother? (I apologize, I know beforehand this is building a mountain out of a molehill...but seriously, I wonder)

Princesses don't get crowned; however, if she's Queen, she can be crowned with the Queen Mother's crown or maybe Queen Mary's. But the Queen Mother's crown was made to go with the Imperial State Crown, so I assume they'd use it.

Stanley Baldwin's government did not regard the Duke of Windsor's marriage to Wallis as morganatic because the duke had already renounced all the rights to the throne for himself as well as his future children between him and Wallis.

That was the King's conclusion with Lord Wigram in order to justify the 1937 Letters Patent. The Government only reluctantly accepted this stance in order to withhold the style of Royal Highness from Wallis.

Legally, it was clear The Duke had relinquished his rights, and that of his descendants, to the throne, but not his right to be royal under his father's 1917 Letters Patent. Therefore, there was no question of his wife being entitled to be HRH.

Nobody is saying that she can choose to BE a princess when she's Queen. The issue is whether she can legally be KNOWN AS a princess even though she's Queen. For one thing, presumably Buckingham Palace didn't come up with this "it is intended that she be known as Princess Consort" stuff out of thin air. For another, it isn't illegal to be known as something you aren't as long as you don't intend to defraud anyone. For another, it's still on the royal family website.

It isn't even "it is intended that" nowadays, it's "she will be known as."

Ah, but they did come up with this scenario out of thin air! Within days of announcing this farce, it was made clear she COULD NOT be known as HRH The Princess Consort without legislation being passed.

Oops.....another blunder from Clarence House. Whether this will, in fact, come to pass remains to be seen and is by no means fait accompli.

I personally think that the Prince of Wales wishes his wife to be styled as HM the Queen when he becomes the king. However, his wife may have a different idea. The Queen may creat her as the Princess Camilla in due course and Camilla may be known as HRH the Princess Camilla, the Princess Consort or some other title which the Queen may grant her. How about the Duchess of, say, Watford ?

I personally think that the Prince of Wales wishes his wife to be styled as HM the Queen when he becomes the king. However, his wife may have a different idea. The Queen may creat her as the Princess Camilla in due course and Camilla may be known as HRH the Princess Camilla, the Princess Consort or some other title which the Queen may grant her. How about the Duchess of, say, Watford ?

There's no question that Prince Charles wants his wife to be Queen when the time comes. How could he not? And that may be exactly what happens since it is very unlikely the Government would agree to introduce legislation changing Camilla's title and style, but it cannot be ruled out either.

The Queen is unlikely to issue letters patent creating Camilla a princess in her own right or giving her a lifetime peerage. What would be the point of that?

Ah, but they did come up with this scenario out of thin air! Within days of announcing this farce, it was made clear she COULD NOT be known as HRH The Princess Consort without legislation being passed.

Oops.....another blunder from Clarence House. Whether this will, in fact, come to pass remains to be seen and is by no means fait accompli.

The weird thing is that it's still on the royal family website. Not just the Clarence House one, but the official one. And the wording now is firmer than when they first added it.

There's no question that Prince Charles wants his wife to be Queen when the time comes. How could he not? And that may be exactly what happens since it is very unlikely the Government would agree to introduce legislation changing Camilla's title and style, but it cannot be ruled out either.

The Queen is unlikely to issue letters patent creating Camilla a princess in her own right or giving her a lifetime peerage. What would be the point of that?

Well, one never knows. There was no greater point in creating Philip Mountbatten as the Duke of Edinburgh but he was created as such that Camilla may be given a title of her own (which may not be a peerage) so that she may become to be known by her own title.

The weird thing is that it's still on the royal family website. Not just the Clarence House one, but the official one. And the wording now is firmer than when they first added it.

Oh, I see.

When they come to some functions & the Royal Meeting at Ascot etc, we have become used to see Camilla as the Duchess of Cornwall that we will perhaps feel quite natural to address her as something else apart from the title which Charles uses. HM the King and the Princess Consort does not sound that bad at all since these are the forms that the Moroccan royal family uses.

There was no greater point in creating Philip Mountbatten as the Duke of Edinburgh but he was created as such that Camilla may be given a title of her own (which may not be a peerage) so that she may become to be known by her own title.

Philip wouldn't have been anything at all without such a creation, though. Had that not happened, he would have been Admiral of the Fleet (after 1953, his various ranks before then) Sir Philip Mountbatten until 1957. (Or, quite possibly and quite strangely, but I think it would have been rectified, Admiral of the Fleet His Royal Highness Sir Philip Mountbatten.)